Trump Administration moves to end legal marijuana.

CFM said:
If the boozer is the one that caused the death, who is supposed to be blamed? Are you saying the innocent person is to blame.

Again, I hope you're one of those that feels the negative effects of what you support. Not you personally but the one you love the most in life.
Click to expand...

According to your Liberal Logic, ... anyone that supports keeping alcohol legal :palm:
 
Bigdog said:
According to your Liberal Logic, ... anyone that supports keeping alcohol legal :palm:
Click to expand...

In other words, you, like SmarterThanYou, believes it OK to drive drunk and smoke up on pot.

That's all that one can conclude from your statement.
 
CFM said:
Gun ownership is a right guaranteed in the 2nd amendment. Which amendment in the Constitution makes marijuana use a right? Be specific.
Click to expand...

the better question is, you hate filled racist piece of shit, is what power in the constitution affords government the power to prohibit possession of marijuana.
 
CFM said:
Gun ownership is a right guaranteed in the 2nd amendment. Which amendment in the Constitution makes marijuana use a right? Be specific.
Click to expand...

the first 10 amendments were only needed because simpletons couldn't grasp the concept of powers being enumerated, not rights being enumerated.

but since you ask that question - why did the federal government need an amendment to ban alcohol. where was that right enumerated?
 
CFM said:
In other words, you, like SmarterThanYou, believes it OK to drive drunk and smoke up on pot.

That's all that one can conclude from your statement.
Click to expand...

yet EVERYBODY can conclude that you're a moron of epic proportions who can't get a damned thing right about what people post on here.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
yet EVERYBODY can conclude that you're a moron of epic proportions who can't get a damned thing right about what people post on here.
Click to expand...

Interesting how YOU show up right after being referenced in a post to someone else.

Everyone can conclude from your statements that you have no problem with people driving drunk.
 
zymurgy said:
the first 10 amendments were only needed because simpletons couldn't grasp the concept of powers being enumerated, not rights being enumerated.

but since you ask that question - why did the federal government need an amendment to ban alcohol. where was that right enumerated?
Click to expand...


You'll have to ask those that wrote that amendment and pushed for it. I don't agree with it having been an amendment.

Are you another pothead that is simply looking out for his personal wants and desires?
 
Bigdog said:
All it takes is a congressional majority to change the pot laws, IDIOT :palm:
Click to expand...


Then why compare this issue to the 2nd amendment? RETARD.

Send your other profile SmarterThanYou back. He's an idiot which, while stupid, is less dumb than you retard.
 
CFM said:
Then why compare this issue to the 2nd amendment? RETARD.

Send your other profile SmarterThanYou back. He's an idiot which, while stupid, is less dumb than you retard.
Click to expand...

Because you want people that support the 2nd to have their loved ones shot and killed. :palm:
 
CFM said:
You'll have to ask those that wrote that amendment and pushed for it. I don't agree with it having been an amendment.

Are you another pothead that is simply looking out for his personal wants and desires?
Click to expand...

what a cop out!

we can read about the original intent of those that wrote it. We can make educated guesses about the original understanding of those that ratified it.

And a great example demonstrating early understanding is prohibition of alcohol. it needed an amendment. Marijuana should require an amendment to outlaw. not the other way around as you are advocating

freedom isn't just something you put on a bumper sticker.

As to your question, I long gave up everything except brewing my own beer, but I find your followup question reprehensible and speaks volumes about your character. I value other peoples freedom, laws aren't designed to favor me. government is purposed to protect all our rights, not to give me an easier path. If you think along the lines you just asked, it likely means you are an asshole.
 
zymurgy said:
what a cop out!

we can read about the original intent of those that wrote it. We can make educated guesses about the original understanding of those that ratified it.

And a great example demonstrating early understanding is prohibition of alcohol. it needed an amendment. Marijuana should require an amendment to outlaw. not the other way around as you are advocating

freedom isn't just something you put on a bumper sticker.

As to your question, I long gave up everything except brewing my own beer, but I find your followup question reprehensible and speaks volumes about your character. I value other peoples freedom, laws aren't designed to favor me. government is purposed to protect all our rights, not to give me an easier path. If you think along the lines you just asked, it likely means you are an asshole.
Click to expand...

I've read the original intent of those that wrote it and the writings of those that pushed for it. It is rather easy to see where the push for prohibition came from.

Alcohol didn't need an amendment to outlaw. If a law passed by Congress can make marijuana illegal, a law passed by Congress could have made alcohol illegal. Same with laws on anything. That prohibition was an amendment was more politically motivated than anything else.

If you find it reprehensible, tough shit. That's your fucking problem, son. If you get upset about me asking the hard questions, it proves you're just another thin skinned pussy.

Something people WANT to do doesn't become a right because they WANT to do it. That's why we are where we are with social programs. People that don't have what another person has believes they have a right to a portion of what that other person learned. If you don't believe me, look at the $22 trillion + spent on social welfare under programs started by LBJ in the 1960s. The sad part about it is those in power agreed doing so not because they cared about others but because they cared about themselves.

You can claim it's about others all you want. If you do, it likely means you're a liar.
 
CFM said:
I've read the original intent of those that wrote it and the writings of those that pushed for it. It is rather easy to see where the push for prohibition came from.

Alcohol didn't need an amendment to outlaw. If a law passed by Congress can make marijuana illegal, a law passed by Congress could have made alcohol illegal. Same with laws on anything. That prohibition was an amendment was more politically motivated than anything else.

If you find it reprehensible, tough shit. That's your fucking problem, son. If you get upset about me asking the hard questions, it proves you're just another thin skinned pussy.

Something people WANT to do doesn't become a right because they WANT to do it. That's why we are where we are with social programs. People that don't have what another person has believes they have a right to a portion of what that other person learned. If you don't believe me, look at the $22 trillion + spent on social welfare under programs started by LBJ in the 1960s. The sad part about it is those in power agreed doing so not because they cared about others but because they cared about themselves.

You can claim it's about others all you want. If you do, it likely means you're a liar.
Click to expand...

the power you are claiming always existed was born in 1942

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn <--- that is where your power comes from, and that is why alcohol needed an amendment, but today congress has complete authority over everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top